 |
| Judge Hall |
Capitol Report New Mexico - Update: We received a call from the Legislative Council
Service telling us the legal fees will actually be substantially more than the $3 million figure reported earlier Monday. In fact, the costs will end up being more like $5.4 million — “at least,” the LCS employee said. While the $3 million figure announced by Judge Hall is correct, we have been told the figure does not count:
*$300,000+ settled on for attorneys and costs to the Navajo Nation
*$460,000 in costs for plaintiffs, experts and legal fees
*$894,402 in legislative expenses, research and polling, and
*$800,000+ in expenses for executive offices of the Governor, Lt. Governor and Secretary of State
Adding those figures, the back of the envelope total is more like $5.4 million in legal fees that taxpayers will end up paying. That’s compared to $3.5 million in legal fees after the redistricting court battles of 2001.
Well, it wasn’t as expensive as the last time around but New Mexico taxpayers will still pay almost $3 million for lawyers involved the recent redistricting legal battles. On Monday, retired district judge Jim Hall – the man assigned to hearing the arguments over realigning voting boundaries for the state — announced awards of nearly $3 million in fees for attorneys who represented Democratic, Republican, Native American and Hispanic interests in redistricting trials heard earlier this year. Like all states, New Mexico has to reapportion districts according to the US Census every 10 years. The $3 million figure is an improvement over the $3.5 million that went out to attorneys the last time New Mexico wrestled with the issue in 2001-2002 and there were fears the price tag would be even higher. Ten years ago, then-Gov. Gary Johnson and the legislature couldn’t come to an agreement on redistricting and we saw a replay in this past legislative session when the Democratically-controlled Roundhouse passed a redistricting map over Republican objections. Republican Gov. Susana Martinez vetoed the legislation, sending the battle to court. Read More News New Mexico
Lawyers get nearly $3 million from taxpayers in redistricting fight UPDATE: Yikes! Legal fees will actually total more than $5.4 million
Reuters - Hard-hit U.S. livestock and poultry producers petitioned the government on Monday to reduce or cancel the required use of ethanol in gasoline for a year, asking for "a little help" to ride out the worst drought in 56 years. The request for a first-ever waiver from the federal Environmental Protection Agency's mandate, which in essence requires that more than a third of the U.S. corn harvest be converted into ethanol, comes as grain prices have surged to record highs, driving up feed costs and squeezing profits for producers. "We are having trouble buying corn... it's really putting a burden on our operations and many others across the nation," says J.D. Alexander, president of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, whose Nebraska feedlot is about half full of cattle. "It's time to wean the ethanol industry and let it stand on its own." The EPA has not granted a waiver since the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) was enacted in 2007. The policy has enjoyed years of staunch bipartisan support, boosting income for U.S. farmers and helping reduce the country's dependence on foreign oil. But it is now coming under renewed attack. The beef, chicken, pork and turkey trade groups said they had delivered a petition to EPA administrator Lisa Jackson to waive the mandate "in whole or in substantial part" for the remainder of this year and part of next. Read More News New Mexico
Posts
